From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Mon Nov 10 2003 - 13:17:31 EST
In a message dated 11/8/03 5:23:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, gmurphy@raex.com
writes:
> What I object to is a jump, explicit or implicit, from that to the idea
> that they knew about modern scientific ideas of either biochemistry or
> evolution.
Of course, the suggestion that evolution is a modern idea is incorrect. If
I'm not mistaken Empedocles was the first to talk about transitional forms, but
I don't have the cite presently. The primary symbol of the entire Bible is the
shepherd. That occupation consists of breeding animals for desired traits.
Of course, it's not natural selection. It's directed selection. But in either
case, we're talking about evolutionary processes and all the Biblical
pastoralists had to know was that their breeding choices had an effect on the
offspring. We clearly see that in Genesis when Jacob weakens Laban's flocks while
strengthening his own. The suggestion that divine inspiration requires the
Biblical authors to have known everything about evolution is unnecessary. They knew
what they had to know to be the "chosen" people.
rich faussette
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Nov 10 2003 - 13:18:45 EST